In-Brace versus Out-of-Brace Protocol for Radiographic Follow-Up of Patients with Idiopathic Scoliosis:A Retrospective Study

The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare two standardized protocols for radiological follow-up (in-brace versus out-of-brace radiographs) to study the rate of curve progression over time in surgically treated idiopathic scoliosis (IS) patients after failed brace treatment. In-brace radiographs have the advantage that proper fit of the brace and in-brace correction can be evaluated. However, detection of progression might theoretically be more difficult. Fifty-one IS patients that underwent surgical treatment after failed brace treatment were included. For 25 patients, follow-up radiographs were taken in-brace. For the other 26 patients, brace treatment was temporarily stopped before out-of-brace follow-up radiographs were taken. Both groups showed significant curve progression compared to baseline after a mean follow-up period of 3.4 years. The protocol with in-brace radiographs was noninferior regarding curve progression rate over time. The estimated monthly Cobb angle progression based on the mixed-effect model was 0.5 degrees in both groups. No interaction effect was found for time, and patients' baseline Cobb angle (p = 0.98), and for time and patients' initial in-brace correction (p = 0.32). The results of this study indicate that with both in-brace and out-of-brace protocols for radiographic follow-up, a similar rate of curve progression can be expected over time in IS patients with failed brace treatment

High failure rate of the interspinous distraction device (X-Stop) for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis caused by degenerative spondylolisthesis

The X-Stop interspinous distraction device has shown to be an attractive alternative to conventional surgical procedures in the treatment of symptomatic degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. However, the effectiveness of the X-Stop in symptomatic degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis caused by degenerative spondylolisthesis is not known. A cohort of 12 consecutive patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis caused by degenerative spondylolisthesis were treated with the X-Stop interspinous distraction device. All patients had low back pain, neurogenic claudication and radiculopathy. Pre-operative radiographs revealed an average slip of 19.6%. MRI of the lumbosacral spine showed a severe stenosis. In ten patients, the X-Stop was placed at the L4–5 level, whereas two patients were treated at both, L3–4 and L4–5 level. The mean follow-up was 30.3 months. In eight patients a complete relief of symptoms was observed post-operatively, whereas the remaining 4 patients experienced no relief of symptoms. Recurrence of pain, neurogenic claudication, and worsening of neurological symptoms was observed in three patients within 24 months. Post-operative radiographs and MRI did not show any changes in the percentage of slip or spinal dimensions. Finally, secondary surgical treatment by decompression with posterolateral fusion was performed in seven patients (58%) within 24 months. In conclusion, the X-Stop interspinous distraction device showed an extremely high failure rate, defined as surgical re-intervention, after short term follow-up in patients with spinal stenosis caused by degenerative spondylolisthesis. We do not recommend the X-Stop for the treatment of spinal stenosis complicating degenerative spondylolisthesis

In-Brace versus Out-of-Brace Protocol for Radiographic Follow-Up of Patients with Idiopathic Scoliosis:A Retrospective Study

The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare two standardized protocols for radiological follow-up (in-brace versus out-of-brace radiographs) to study the rate of curve progression over time in surgically treated idiopathic scoliosis (IS) patients after failed brace treatment. In-brace radiographs have the advantage that proper fit of the brace and in-brace correction can be evaluated. However, detection of progression might theoretically be more difficult. Fifty-one IS patients that underwent surgical treatment after failed brace treatment were included. For 25 patients, follow-up radiographs were taken in-brace. For the other 26 patients, brace treatment was temporarily stopped before out-of-brace follow-up radiographs were taken. Both groups showed significant curve progression compared to baseline after a mean follow-up period of 3.4 years. The protocol with in-brace radiographs was noninferior regarding curve progression rate over time. The estimated monthly Cobb angle progression based on the mixed-effect model was 0.5 degrees in both groups. No interaction effect was found for time, and patients' baseline Cobb angle (p = 0.98), and for time and patients' initial in-brace correction (p = 0.32). The results of this study indicate that with both in-brace and out-of-brace protocols for radiographic follow-up, a similar rate of curve progression can be expected over time in IS patients with failed brace treatment.</p

Are torso asymmetry and torso displacements in a computer brace model associated with initial in-brace correction in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis?

Abstract Background Lack of initial in-brace correction is strongly predictive for brace treatment failure in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients. Computer-aided design (CAD) technology could be useful in quantifying the trunk in 3D and brace characteristics in order to further investigate the effect of brace modifications on initial in-brace correction and subsequently long-term brace treatment success. The purpose of this pilot study was to identify parameters obtained from 3D surface scans which influence the initial in-brace correction (IBC) in a Boston brace in patients with AIS. Methods Twenty-five AIS patients receiving a CAD-based Boston brace were included in this pilot study consisting of 11 patients with Lenke classification type 1 and 14 with type 5 curves. The degree of torso asymmetry and segmental peak positive and negative torso displacements were analyzed with the use of patients’ 3D surface scans and brace models for potential correlations with IBC. Results The mean IBC of the major curve on AP view was 15.9% (SD = 9.1%) for the Lenke type 1 curves, and 20.1% (SD = 13.9%) for the type 5 curves. The degree of torso asymmetry was weakly correlated with patient’s pre-brace major curve Cobb angle and negligible correlated with major curve IBC. Mostly weak or negligible correlations were observed between IBC and the twelve segmental peak displacements for both Lenke type 1 and 5 curves. Conclusion Based on the results of this pilot study, the degree of torso asymmetry and segmental peak torso displacements in the brace model alone are not clearly associated with IBC

Comparing Motor-Evoked Potential Characteristics of NEedle versus suRFACE Recording Electrodes during Spinal Cord Monitoring—The NERFACE Study Part I

Muscle-recorded transcranial electrical stimulation motor-evoked potentials (mTc-MEPs) are used to assess the spinal cord integrity. They are commonly recorded with subcutaneous needle or surface electrodes, but the different characteristics of mTc-MEP signals recorded with the two types of electrodes have not been formally compared yet. In this study, mTc-MEPs were simultaneously recorded from the tibialis anterior (TA) muscles using surface and subcutaneous needle electrodes in 242 consecutive patients. Elicitability, motor thresholds, amplitude, area under the curve (AUC), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and the variability between mTc-MEP amplitudes were compared. Whereas amplitude and AUC were significantly higher in subcutaneous needle recordings (p 2 in more than 99.5% of the surface and subcutaneous needle recordings, and the variability between consecutive amplitudes was not significantly different between the two recording electrode types (p = 0.34). Surface electrodes appear to be a good alternative to needle electrodes for spinal cord monitoring. They are non-invasive, can record signals at similar threshold intensities, have adequately high SNRs, and record signals with equivalent variability. Whether surface electrodes are non-inferior to subcutaneous needle electrodes in detecting motor warnings is investigated in part II of the NERFACE study

Use of NEedle Versus suRFACE Recording Electrodes for Detection of Intraoperative Motor Warnings: A Non-Inferiority Trial. The NERFACE Study Part II

In the NERFACE study part I, the characteristics of muscle transcranial electrical stimulation motor evoked potentials (mTc-MEPs) recorded from the tibialis anterior (TA) muscles with surface and subcutaneous needle electrodes were compared. The aim of this study (NERFACE part II) was to investigate whether the use of surface electrodes was non-inferior to the use of subcutaneous needle electrodes in detecting mTc-MEP warnings during spinal cord monitoring. mTc-MEPs were simultaneously recorded from TA muscles with surface and subcutaneous needle electrodes. Monitoring outcomes (no warning, reversible warning, irreversible warning, complete loss of mTc-MEP amplitude) and neurological outcomes (no, transient, or permanent new motor deficits) were collected. The non-inferiority margin was 5%. In total, 210 (86.8%) out of 242 consecutive patients were included. There was a perfect agreement between both recording electrode types for the detection of mTc-MEP warnings. For both electrode types, the proportion of patients with a warning was 0.12 (25/210) (difference, 0.0% (one-sided 95% CI, 0.014)), indicating non-inferiority of the surface electrode. Moreover, reversible warnings for both electrode types were never followed by permanent new motor deficits, whereas among the 10 patients with irreversible warnings or complete loss of amplitude, more than half developed transient or permanent new motor deficits. In conclusion, the use of surface electrodes was non-inferior to the use of subcutaneous needle electrodes for the detection of mTc-MEP warnings recorded over the TA muscles

Validity and reliability of the adapted Dutch version of the Brace Questionnaire (BrQ)

Background and purpose: The Brace Questionnaire (BrQ) is a disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instrument for measuring perceived health status of scoliosis patients undergoing brace treatment. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the validity and reliability of a translated and culturally adapted Dutch version of the BrQ. Patients and methods: The original Greek BrQ was translated into Dutch and a cross-cultural adaptation and validation processes were conducted. Subsequently, 80 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients undergoing active brace treatment were included from 4 scoliosis centers to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the BrQ. The questionnaire’s floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency, and test–retest reliability were assessed. Concurrent validity was evaluated by comparing the BrQ with the revised Scoliosis Research Society 22-item questionnaire (SRS-22r) scores. Results: The mean total BrQ score was 75.9 (standard deviation [SD] 11.3) and the mean domain scores varied between 3.4 (SD 0.9) and 4.2 (SD 0.7) for the domains “vitality” and “bodily pain,” respectively. There were no floor and ceiling effects for the total BrQ score. The BrQ showed satisfactory internal consistency in most subdomains with a Cronbach’s α ranging between 0.35 for the domain “general health perception” and 0.89 for the domain “self-esteem and aesthetics.” Excellent test–retest reproducibility was observed for the total BrQ score (ICC 0.91), and the BrQ was successfully validated against the SRS-22r. Conclusion: The translated and culturally adapted Dutch version of the BrQ is a valid and reliable HRQOL instrument for AIS patients undergoing brace treatment